/m/a-rod

Reader Comments and Retorts

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Jaoui said other than receiving free food that he said had been donated to the group, he hadn’t received any compensation.

“There’s a lot of people out here with no jobs,” he said. “Don’t you think there’d be more than 40 people if we were getting paid to be here? Free lunch is great, that’s amazing I’m not going to lie that’s a plus. But we’re not there for food, but its nice. We’re supporting an organization.”

There was no indication, Jaoui said, that Rodriguez had anything to do with sending the free food.

“I would have loved that,” he said. “I would have said in my [Facebook] status ‘hey A-Rod fed me today’, but no.”

As for the similarity of the signs, Jaoui said he had seen three people writing them out the other day after Hispanics Across America employees brought in markers and supplies to the protest site.

I haven't gone through the current CBA in detail, but I'm pretty sure that in the previous CBAs allegations of CBA violations were supposed to go to an arbitrator. And I'd be really surprised if that's changed.

The central allegation that Selig and co.'s goal was, "to improperly marshal evidence that they hope to use to destroy the reputation and career of Alex Rodriguez." are to my mind clearly outside the scope of the CBA, but the stuff about the leaking seems a non-starter.

MLB's ethically challenged behavior seemingly reached rock bottom in their negotiations with Anthony Bosch, the alleged mastermind who controlled Biogenesis. Multiple media outlets have reported that MLB negotiated with Bosch to drop its suit
against him in exchange for his full cooperation in providing evidence and testimony against MLB players. In exchange for his assistance, MLB has also promised to provide Bosch with personal security, pay his legal bills, and indemnify him for civil liability that may arise from his cooperation. Moreover, according to at least one individual who claims to have knowledge of Mr. Bosch's deal, MLB is paying Mr. Bosch a total of $5 million (in monthly installments) in order to buy his cooperation.

I'm not sure how NY law operates on this, but courts generally won't give any credit (once MLB moves to dismiss) to claims from "one individual who claims to have knowledge" without describing how he came to that knowledge.

I suppose this could be a bit of a bargaining chip in a global settlement of all things A-Rod, but I don't think it provides Rodriguez any actual leverage unless he can prove the allegations and/or MLB has stuff they really don't want to come out during the discovery process.

This lawsuit is a clear violation of the confidentiality provisions of our drug program, and it is nothing more than a desperate attempt to circumvent the Collective Bargaining Agreement.

Granting that this is a "shameless" statement and that MLB has behaved badly in all of this, if the contention is that "MLB persistently have employed powers not available to them under the collectively-bargained agreements between MLB and its union", isn't the MLBPA the one that should be filing this suit?

I haven't really read anything yet so I can't comment. But one major problem for MLB is that the arbitration arena is (supposed to be)confidential, whereas court proceedings will end up airing a lot of their dirty laundry -- and there does appear to be a lot of dirty laundry here, in the form of (at least taking the allegations for what they're worth) buying evidence for absurd sums, intimidating witnesses, impersonating law enforcement officials, and basically having a singular focus of destroying Alex Rodriguez -- defaming him, ruining his career, voiding a large swathe of his contract in one fell swoop -- which is simply not what the JDA was supposed to be about.

Yes, these are just allegations. And I don't know that they will hurt MLB's bottom line. But at the same time I can't see anything good coming out of this for MLB, to basically be portrayed and viewed by a large segment of the sports public as an organized crime type operation (granted the Walt Disney version). Even the people crazed about steroids can be concerned about issues of fundamental fairness.

And they really seem to have gone above and beyond here in a scorched-earth approach to "Get ARod." Had they just suspended him for ~50 games like the others I doubt we would have seen this.

MLB's incessant use of the media against Mr. Rodriguez reached new lows on August 19, 2013, when it ambushed Mr. Rodriguez's counsel, Joseph Tacopina, on live, national television with a letter offering to publicly release all confidential information
regarding Mr. Rodriguez. MLB's request effectively sought to amend or waive the confidentiality provisions ofthe JDA, yet MLB cut MLBPA (the players' exclusive bargaining representative) out ofthe process by neither copying MLBPA on the letter, nor sending it to MLBP A. In a further demonstration of its bad faith, MLB did not send this letter to Mr. Rodriguez's counsel or Mr. Rodriguez. Instead, this letter- which itself contained substantial confidential information concerning MLB 's investigation of Mr. Rodriguez- was delivered only to the Today Show, and subsequently "released" by MLB to the New York Times and other media outlets.

While that is pretty scummy, the compliant shouldn't trash MLB for going on national television to discuss the investigation and then say that A-Rod's lawyers did the same thing.

I think the Rodriguez camp would probably point to Michael Weiner's statements regarding (and I'm paraphrasing from memory here) the MLBPA's unwillingness to defend steroid users.

Now, if you (or MLB or the judge or a lawyer) wants to argue that Rodriguez should first sue the MLBPA in order to get them to file suit, I can see that.

IANAL, though.

I guess my question (and IANAL either) would be: If MLB and MLBPA agree that something is within the "powers ... available ... under the collectively-bargained agreements between MLB and its union", does that automatically make it so, from a legal perspective? Or, as you suggest, is it MLBPA that's failing A-Rod here by washing their hands of him, rather than (or, in addition to) MLB?

* Weiner made a general statement over the summer that for players with "overwhelming evidence" against them, he would encourage a settlement.

* Weiner stated as well regarding the ARod case specifically that the union looked at some of the evidence and they suggested a number to ARod that he settle at. However, MLB never came close to accepting that number, so there was nothing really to discuss, either from the union's perspective or ARod's. The union felt that MLB's suspension was out of line.

Now - how much the union has been fighting on ARod's behalf, I can't say. But it appears they are at least on board generally and providing assistance.

The complaint is worth a full read. There's some serious, mob-like allegations:

On June 20, 2013, the Miami New Times interviewed Porter Fischer, the former Biogenesis employee. In the interview, Fischer provided more details on MLB’s attempt to coerce his testimony. He told the New Times that MLB investigators offered him $1,000 per week salary as a consultant if he would cooperate, and on another occasion, offered him $125,000 for all the Biogenesis records he had, and an affidavit attesting to their authenticity.

In addition, Fischer filed a complaint with Boca Raton, Florida police regarding a March 24,2013 theft of Biogenesis-related documents from his car In the police report, Fischer described several meetings with Ed Moldonado, Tom Riley and Dan Mullin- investigators employed by MLB- who offered him a job and up to $125,000 for the client files prior to this incident. Shortly after the theft, MLB stopped contacting Fischer about the documents Further, an investigator working for MLB- Kevin O’Rourke- also contacted the Boca Raton Police Department to inquire (without success) about the incident.

Dan Mullin of MLB purchased what were represented to be these stolen documents for $150,000 in cash, which was handed off in a bag at a Fort Lauderdale, Florida area restaurant Upon information and belief, neither the recipient of the cash, nor MLB, filed the required IRS form 8300 for a cash transaction in excess of$10,000. Failure to do so is a federal offense MLB’s conduct may also fall under the Klein conspiracy theory of criminal liability.

Mr Mullin’s actions should come as no surprise as- despite his role as an investigator for MLB in this matter- he engaged in an inappropriate sexual relationship with a witness whom he himself interviewed about the Biogenesis matter.

Mr Madden stated several times in the interview that the information he discussed was known only to MLB, and was provided to Madden by MLB officials. MLB and Commissioner Selig engaged in, and continue to engage in, this gratuitous violation of Mr Rodriguez’s right to a confidential investigation and appeal in the hopes of currying favorable coverage in the press. At least with respect to Mr Madden, their strategy has succeeded, as reflected in a July 24th article in the New York Daily News, where Mr Madden called Mr Rodriguez the “most wanted criminal in the game’s history” and even went so far as to compare Mr Rodriguez to Whitey Bulger, a convicted murderer and organized crime figure.

There are more substantive damages listed later on (e.g. loss of specific endorsements, removal from an animated movie project). But this seems mostly to be a "hey, Bud, guess who else can sue just to get discovery?" tactic. It's also a nice public way to add as-yet unsubstantiated anti-MLB allegations to the as-yet unsubstantiated anti-A-Rod allegations, as well as a thick, satisfying shit on any plans Bud Selig might have had to give himself a Mariano sendoff.

The NY Daily News is quoting "one sports lawyer not connected to the filing... who requested anonymity" as saying that the lawsuit means the arbitration hearing is going against A-Rod. Based on the News' previous reporting acumen, that means A-Rod will soon be the owner of the Milwaukee Brewers.

This case raises novel legal procedural issues as well. Under Jones v. Butz, animals lack standing to sue. This is at least a partial challenge to that case, and I'm curious to see how the courts will rule.

Seems Bud might have pushed his luck too far with that 211 game suspension. Give A-Rod a 50 game and it probably would've been over already, maybe push to 65 ala Braun. But 211? That clearly was trying to end A-Rod's career and he could blow $10 million+ on lawyers and if it just reduces it to 100 he'd make a big profit. Not a good move on Selig's part.

The NY Daily News is quoting "one sports lawyer not connected to the filing... who requested anonymity" as saying that the lawsuit means the arbitration hearing is going against A-Rod.

So after a single witness, who hadn't finished his direct testimony and certainly hadn't been subject to what everyone expects to be a strong cross, the NYDN is willing to suggest the arbitration case is going against A-Rod?

Until this moment, Mr. Journalist, I think I have never really gauged your cruelty or your recklessness. Little did I dream you could be so reckless and so cruel as to do an injury to that lad. It is true he is still with the New York Yankees. It is true that he will continue to be with the New York Yankees. It is, I regret to say, equally true that I fear he shall always bear a scar needlessly inflicted by you. If it were in my power to forgive you for your reckless cruelty I would do so. I like to think I am a gentle man but your forgiveness will have to come from someone other than me. Mr. Journalist, may we not drop this? Let us not assassinate this lad further, Mr. Journalist. You've done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?

Major League Baseball (“MLB”), Commissioner Allan H. “Bud” Selig (“Commissioner Selig” or “Selig”) and other officials at MLB (collectively, the “Defendants”) have - throughout at least all of2013 - been engaged in tortious and egregious conduct with one, and only one, goal: to improperly marshal evidence that they hope to use to destroy the reputation and career of Alex Rodriguez…

I'd just love to see A-Rod being asked on the witness stand to spell "tortious" and "egregious".

I'd just love to see A-Rod being asked on the witness stand to spell "tortious" and "egregious".

Using past winning words from the National Spelling Bee, if Selig hadn't been so pococurante about launching a kamikaze attack on a person with a more than ample supply of smaragdine guerdon, he might have had the prospicience to see that A-Rod wasn't going to sit quietly for his own vivisepulture. It's no surprise that Rodriguez has taken the demarche of an interlocutory, albeit one with a touch of appoggiatura. A-Rod's guetapens won't have an antpyretic or eudarmonic effect on the media, but it's a major spoliator for Selig's deification.

Any thoughts from attorneys or others with relevant knowledge bases here as to how this might go down?

It's really too early to tell at this point, even if I had read the filing. Some of ARod's claims (both in this filing and in expected future lawsuits) will be hard to prevail on, but some do have legs. For now I'll just note that MLB has opened the door to a sh!tshow here, and it will be a mess for them. What is the downside for ARod from the standpoint of his reputation? That people will think he used steroids in <gasp!> multiple years? That people will think he tried to buy his medical records? They already think that. The upside to ARod is that he helps protect his career and his contract.

#66 - with a lot of publicity and very little legal wrangling, this will likely not survive a motion to compel arbitration as the factual allegations all pertain to the investigation and suspension under the CBA. If somehow it survives that,most of the complaint gets sticken under New York's version of 12(f)(2) which prohibits the inclusion of purely scandalous material in a pleading. Two quick examples: the references to the 1980s collusion and the investigators sexual dalliance with a witness are not probative to any issue at hand and included as red meat for the press.

Edit: I don't think it will survive in this suit, but the allegation that MLB had the audacity to use the Biogenesis case to subpoena the records of Rodriguez's law firm shocked me.

#69, yeah, I'm not a big fan of putting things in the filing like "to gloss over Selig's past inaction and tacit approval of the use of performance enhancing substances in baseball … in an attempt to secure his legacy as the 'savior' of America's pastime."

Just stick to specific factual claims rather than speculating about what is going on in the diseased mind of Selig. Statements like these can reduce the seriousness of a complaint to a circus filing.

#66 - with a lot of publicity and very little legal wrangling, this will likely not survive a motion to compel arbitration as the factual allegations all pertain to the investigation and suspension under the CBA.

Perhaps that's why the allegation is for tortuous interference, rather than a breach of the CBA. A claim in tort, and against Selig personally, might help avoid arbitration and other provisions of the CBA.

On Friday night, Rodriguez filed a second lawsuit, against New York Yankees team doctor Chris Ahmad and New York Presbyterian/Columbia University Medical Center, alleging malpractice for misdiagnosing his left hip injury during the 2012 playoffs. Rodriguez and his lawyers contend Ahmad failed to tell him about an MRI showing his hip injury and are seeking damages. The Yankees were not named in either suit.
. . .
Dating back to the 2012 playoffs, that lawsuit states "after performing, understanding and analyzing the MRI, had diagnosed Plantiff as suffering from a superior labral tear at the left hip; and without informing the plaintiff of the diagnosis, knowingly cleared the Plaintiff to resume playing as a third baseman for the New York Yankees during the [2012] season playoffs, thus allowing the Plaintiff to further injure himself and the necessity for additional surgeries."

Tortious interference? Really? That's the best they could come up with?

I'd have tossed in at least defamation for good measure, even though it would be difficult for ARod to prevail. But I think they've held back on some of their claims because they've decided not to sue the Yankees yet. If/when they sue the Yankees together with MLB, I expect some combination of defamation and maybe collusion. They may also sue the Yankees for fraud in connection with the dealings with the doctor who allegedly failed to inform ARod that he had a tear in his left hip, which would wrap in insurance fraud -- but such a claim seems properly suited for a grievance procedure.

As to tortious interference -- yes, it often has little chance for success. But, then, the allegations against MLB if proven are egregious.

Also, it's worth noting that twice in the complaint ARod's attorneys allege state that the JDA contemplates only 50 games for a first offense on use/possession, and this is "161 games" more than that. So you can believe that ARod intends to argue that they simply cannot suspend him for more than 50 games on use/possession.

And as Walt noted, MLB's statements on the matter seem to suggest that they are going for multiple use plus obstruction -- i.e., not participation in the sale/distribution.

A massive number of games on obstruction when (a) suspending based on obstruction is not permitted by the JDA (maybe the CBA but I can't imagine that would work), (b) even if the arbitrator goes along with some games for obstruction MLB's meting out of punishment for this that massively exceeds the 50 games for a first suspension on use/possession therefore is simply out line, and (c) the other players didn't get any games for this including Melky who set up a fake website to avoid discipline, is simply the stuff of fantasies.

a-rod is a worrisome combo for mlb. one, he can self fund any path he wants to follow. two, he is clearly alienated from most of the other players which means he is likely not worried about relationships being affected by any of his legal actions. three, he's at the end of his career and like selig, likely wants to go out in some manner with some dignity.

he has little to lose. if he loses he's still regarded as a schmuck. but if he WINS, well, now he has smeared mlb with a big sh8t stain that will be seen and smelled from ny to la

The letter, which was obtained by The New York Times and has not been previously reported, was dated Aug. 22 and sent on the letterhead of Reed Smith, one of the law firms representing Rodriguez. In it, Rodriguez’s lawyers notified the players association that they believed the union failed to “fairly represent his interests” regarding Major League Baseball’s investigation of Biogenesis of America, a South Florida anti-aging clinic that baseball officials say dispensed banned substances to ballplayers, including Rodriguez.

The letter argued that the players association had missed opportunities to challenge baseball officials’ aggressive investigative tactics; that the union had not strongly enough condemned baseball’s “gratuitous leaks” to the news media; and, most pointedly, that Michael Weiner, the union’s executive director, had publicly compromised Rodriguez’s position in a radio interview when he signaled that Rodriguez should have accepted some type of suspension “based on the evidence we saw.” Rodriguez and his personal lawyers have steadfastly maintained that Rodriguez should not have been suspended.The union “has made matters worse by failing to protest M.L.B.’s thuggish tactics in its investigation, including paying individuals to produce documents and to testify on M.L.B.’s behalf, and bullying and intimidating those individuals who refuse to cooperate with their ‘witch hunt’ against the players — indeed principally Mr. Rodriguez,” the letter said.

The four-page letter was addressed to David Prouty, the players association’s general counsel. It aimed to replace the union’s lawyer for a crucial arbitration hearing regarding the suspension.

It was unclear how the union responded, but the letter apparently proved unsuccessful. At the hearing, which began Monday and will continue in mid-October, Prouty served on the arbitration panel as Rodriguez’s representative. The other members of the panel are Robert Manfred, a senior executive in Major League Baseball, and Fredric Horowitz, an independent arbitrator appointed by both sides.

The union has for a long time fallen down on the job with regard to the drug issue. Even Weiner's general statement that the union would look to make a deal with MLB when there was overwhelming evidence against a player compromises the players implicated and helps turn public opinion against the players. The union could have made some harsh public statements when MLB filed the sham lawsuit against Biogenesis but instead said nothing.

And I agree with ARod: Weiner should not have made the statement that the union suggested a number for ARod to take but he was never given it.

If somehow it survives that,most of the complaint gets sticken under New York's version of 12(f)(2) which prohibits the inclusion of purely scandalous material in a pleading. Two quick examples: the references to the 1980s collusion and the investigators sexual dalliance with a witness are not probative to any issue at hand and included as red meat for the press.

I agree the collusion issue should not have been included, but it seems to me that an investigator sleeping with a witness could reasonably call into question the tactics of the investigator and/or evidence received from the witness. That it is scandalous is just icing on the cake.